Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

I dont think that a new formula is the answer, and no matter how much you may dislike them ferrari are an integral part of motor racing!
The key is to get some new blood with some new idea's and get rid of the concord agreement, this is where the problem lies!:(

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

the only real problem with the concorde agreement is that if any changes are made to the rules all the teams have to agree on this which they can't do.. just look at the US GP all the teams APART from Ferrari said they wouldn't race but when it started Jordan made a u-turn and then Minardi had to do the same..

i agree more teams need to be in it, maybe by using customer chassis \ engines then it could be more exciting rather than the closed shop you have now

the thing is each of us on this thread would have different views on how the actual rules of F1, car design, refueling etc should be done.. there is no right or wrong way forward

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

to quote dodgeball....'youve got to grab it by the horns and hump it into submission....thats the only way'


seriosuly though, the sport worked well when it was a dictatorship, and when you did not ahve to have every team agreeing to every change, by the nature of competition the teams will never agree!!!
why should one team disadvantgae itself to help its rivals??? it makes no sense at all!

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

agree it need a dictator but someone with better ideas than Max and his "game of chess" strategy F1 with refueling

this is why the GPWC rival series won't work.. imagine if at the first race Renault are 5 seconds ahead of every other car.. the car makers who will own this series won't be able to agree to change the rules as Renault will vote against anything to eat into their 5 second advantage

Personally to cut costs and increase the spectactly of F1 i'd make the teams use the same car and aero profile for each race.. compare a Monaca F1 car with a Monza one and you will see all the extra bits they put on.. no longer to drivers have to work around a cars strengths and weaknesses for each race they setup the car to near perfection all the time

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

I think the system of no tyre changes is good in the race as it spices things up, an equal distribution of TV revenue would not go ammis, as well as a spending cap on development for each one of the teams (so as they would not disrupt employees) with each teams finances having to be submitted by the FIA (prefferablly without MM) this would give the small teams a chance
points for qualifying like Btcc!
slick tyres
no cap on engine size!
more circuits (this includes getting rid of ones like hungary that no-one likes)
no traction controll of launch controll
no exotic materials

er and make paul stoddart president of FIA :D

what does everyone else think?

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

Could you say why you don't think it's the answer? I don't mean to sound rude (no really I don't!) but it's quite hard to discuss an idea if we only say I think "x" and you say no "x" is no good!

I think a new formula will be the answer - F1 is in decline, this year's rules have added drama to the event, but then when a catastrophe like Indy happens the FIA show true colours and blame everyone else, instead of doing their job and being the catalyst for a compromise (plenty of which were offered to the FIA and declined).

Something needs injecting quickly to stop the rot. Personally i think this is best served by a new formula, bypassing the FIA altogether. It's all gone too far now for the FIA to recover (without on-screen ritual beatings of Max) and an unceronomious public dumping of F1 will generate huge and positive publicity for the new formula - problems sorted (for the time being at least).

BTW, it's not a question of my not liking Ferrai - I think they're superb. It's just that they behave as it is their personal Formula, and I think that they and the FIA both behave in most a unsportsmanlike manner.

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

Actually I think the American Indy/ Champ car series has the right idea, you can only have *five* mechanics work on the car in the pit box, instead of the 20+ that F1 generates!

Both of those I would certainly agree with.

I'm not so sure about these. The reason for the grooved tyres and restricted engine size regulation is actually (or, at least supposed to be) to slow cars down for sheer safety reasons.

I agree with no traction control and reducing all the electronic gizmos, it's supposed to be about the *driver*, not the computers, however the development of "exotic materials" has a "trickle down" effect that benefits society as a whole.

Well he can't be a bigger pillock than Max Mosely...!

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

see my post above the car makers can't agree on anything and if they run a series it will be a disaster.. imagine if at the first race BMW are 5 seconds slower than the rest and they face the prospect of finishing every race last.. they will call for a change in the rules to even this up but all the other teams won't go for it..

i guess we all have our ideas on what we would like F1 to be here's my idea

ban refeuling so races are won my the fastest car not the best strategy
return to slick tyres with wider rear tyres, tyre companies should be tyres that can last 70% of race before being changed
ban all the sensors on the car, without these the electronics can't sense what is going on and react to it. Also has several knock on effects. Most of the testing is done to get data from these sensors. If they aren't there the purpose of testing is reduce. After each session at a GP you can't see the drivers because they are always reviewing this data
Cars to use the same aero profile for each race. i.e no sticking on of extra parts for high downforce tracks.. force the drivers to adapt to each circuit
aero changes to the cars allowed at only 3 points of the season,, if they can't change each race there will be less need to test
ban tyre warmers
each day of the GP weekend to include a 1 hour signing session with fans, also teams should run free open days for the F1 fans once a year either at end or start of season
qualifying to return to 1 hour session with unlimited laps
V8, V10 or V12 engines with differing tank sizes
teams allowed to sell parts to other teams i.e customer chassis to encourage more teams to enter
wind tunnel time to be equal to that which the team with the smallest budget can afford
accounts to be submitted to the FIA, FIA to be able to introduce a budget cap either overall or in certain areas e.g testing, wind tunnel etc
rule book to be more open to allow for different looking cars
car developments to be submitted to FIA before development, teams shouldn't waste money designing and testing parts that then get banned because another top team doesn't have it
sequential gear box used via a convential geat stick
ban on fly bay wire throttles, if it isn't an electronic signal then it can't be changed
ban on electronics, see sensors rule above

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

And make Michael Shoemaker to tow a caravan perhaps?

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

No, different teams on different strategies makes the race interesting

Grooved tyres were introduced to slow the cars down, if the go back to slicks they will have to slow them down some other way.

IMO there should only be one tyre supplier.

All driving aids should be removed, but I don't see the point in removing all telemetry.

I don't see the point in that
Great idea if you 1st corner smashes every race.

All teams could use a bit more PR
I thought the 12 lap system was adequate

any engine configuration should be allowable as long as the capacity is the same.

Tank sizes should be the same.

But then you may get smaller teams bowing to the larger teams eg Sauber - Ferrari

I agree there should be a limit on testing in wind tunnels

There should be a limit on money spent on development

I don't have problem with paddle shift as long as it is manual and not automatic

Agreed all driving aids should be banned

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

well we all going to have our own idea

the thing i hate about refueling is listen to the interviews from the drivers since it's been introduce.. they all say " you can't pass i decided to wait for the stops" i want to see racing on the track and by having no refueling it is forcing the drivers to overtake.. also a race should be won by the best driver not because a simulation worked out a quicker strategy than someone else. cars racing each other would be more interesting and is easier for the casual viewer of f1

my idea on banning the telemetry is that it should play into the hands of the better drivers instead of having a computer say what is happening the driver should do it. a better driver will get more out of the car rather than having to look at the data and talk to engineers, also means less testing as they can't get the data back, and also the sensors can't be used to run driver aids

with less data to go through at a GP weekend the drivers could then use that spare time to SHOCK HORROR :Yikes: :Yikes: :Yikes: :Yikes: meet the fans

my idea on selling parts was to get more teams in.. more teams = better racing mabe there could be a 2 tier budget championship.. if you below a certain amount you can buy parts \ chassis and if you are above x then you can build your own

my using a normal gear stick it goes back to the driver having to do more work and maybe makea mistake rather than holding the wheel all the time

banning of tyre warmers will put more skill on the drivers having to cope with code tyres.. Champ Car and IRL work ok without first corner crashes

i'll let someone else worry about the safety!!

as i've said before it's a shame Gp2 isn't used to try out some of these ideas or even the F1 rules for 08 the FIA want where it isn't in the public eye so much instead of forcing that to be like F1

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

Its a good game, this - my ideas would be as follows

allow full ground effects aerodynamics, but reduce the size of the front & rear wings - the idea being to maintain downforce, but with less turbulence off the wings. Hopefully this would make slipstreaming & overtaking easier.

Remove all driver aids like traction control.

Have fully manual sequential gearboxes.

Have steel brakes, not carbon or ceramic - the idea being to increase the braking distances, leading to more overtaking into the corners.

Everyone use the same tyres.

Apart from the weight, the fuel & the engines, that is almost the same spec as a Champ car, which i find much more exiting to watch (on street circuits, anyway).

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

yep have to say that list above is good.. if only the FIA looked at this thread :D

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

Can't say I agree with this one, the tactical decisions on two stops, three stops etc can make a boring race interesting.

As I pointed out above, the grooved tyres were introduced in an attempt to slow cars down (ok, it didn't exactly work, but it stopped them going faster sooner!). I do think the tyres should have greater longevity.

Sorry, but all this will mean is that teams have to spend *more* money on physical testing which will disadvantage the smaller teams.

Or they're shmoozing with the Corporate Sponsors.

I think the aero/ downforce rules need modifying because the "dirty air" cars leave behind them stops other cars slipstreaming so much and thus helping them pass when they get a "tow" along a straight, but downforce is also there for safety.

Again I think this will mean *more* testing as they try to find an optimal layout that will cover eg the next four races.

No, this is not a good idea without a fundamental redesign of cars. It was tyres cooling off (and thus changing the amount of grip) which was the cause of Ayrton Senna's death.

Not unlimited, but I think the 12 lap system worked quite well, although I'd make the *fastest* teams go out first!

A nice idea, but the rich teams would then shift to eg expensive computer modelling techniques that the small teams couldn't afford.

That I can agree with.

But this will, again, just advantage the rich teams who can spend more money/ time on experimenting with different set-ups even with a budget cap.

How does that square with the previous point of the rulebook being more open, though?

I don't agree with these one and frankly I think this sort of thing should be introduced into more ordinary road cars, eg it's really not necessary to have a manual gear shift on the floor any more.
__________________

But that's not the fault of refuelling, that's the fault of the tracks. IMO we need to ditch or fundamentally redesign many of the old tracks (and especially get rid of Monaco which is a joke) and introduce more like Bahrain and Shanghai with multiple passing places.
__________________

The problem with ground effect was that it would literally clamp the car to the track. It meant you could corner like you were on rails, but also reduced manoeuvrability at the same time.

Re: All F1 2005 Discussions
 

One of the problems with F1 is that races become processions with mechanical failure being one of the main thing that alters the finishing order. With the fastest cars from qualifying being at the front and overtaking being nigh on impossible a lot of races lose the sparkle that once existed. You get the situation where a couple of cars go speeding off into the distance with a slower car in third place which is having a problem holding up a train of cars which could go much faster if only they could get past. This often results in the only racing worth watching being amongst the lower placed cars, the winner being obvious after a couple of laps as long as everythings holds together.

Something should be done to encourage more overtaking and make it easier and to give the slower teams a chance.

Perhaps a speed limiter on the cars together with a "push to pass" system such as Champ cars have. This would prevent potentially faster cars from pulling away on the straights from the slower cars who could use the "push to pass" to give them the extra grunt meaning a Minardi using "push to pass" could pass a Ferrari not using it. Something along the lines of cars being restricted to x mph with "push to pass" allowing them to achieve x+y mph when used with say 30 seconds of "push to pass" being available during the race. The push to pass time could be varied from race to race in a handicap system where the slower cars had more seconds available than the faster ones.

You could have a really big shake up of the points sytem with points being gained in qualifying and for fastest lap as well as the race finishing order. I would love to see a race where 20 points were awarded for fastest qualifying going down to 1 point for slowest with cars starting the race in reverse grid order to qualifying. The fastest qualifier would then get 20 qualifyng points and would have to pass every other car to get the 20 race win points.